gamepolitics: Dorothy, We're Not in Kansas Anymore... Guv Hints at Game Law

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-01-10 07:10:00

Entry tags:

democrats, kansas, legislation, sebelius

Dorothy, We're Not in Kansas Anymore... Guv Hints at Game Law

Toto, hide the video games...

Will Kansas join the growing list of states with game legislation in 2006? It seems likely, based on comments made last night by Governor Kathleen Sebelius during her State of the State address to assembled legislators.

Sebelius, a Democrat, made the following comments in relation to games during her address. Her words appear to signal upcoming legislation:

"Parents today face new challenges that we didn't have when our children were younger. Video games and music lyrics promote violence... Moms and dads shouldn't be alone in their fight to raise children the right way. They shouldn't be alone in their fight to instill the values that lead to a life of meaning, rather than a life wasted. We can help parents by giving them access to tools... and limits on access to violent video games. In the coming days, I will make these tools available to parents across Kansas."

GamePolitics will be tracking this story for further developments.

Page 1 of 3
<<	[1] [2] [3]	>>

(327 comments) - (Post a new comment)

	Sigh another politician jumping on the bandwagon (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 12:45 pm UTC (link)
	First off, has this lady looked at all the video game legislation's proposed in the last couple months? This one will be declared unconstitutional like all the rest. Second, violence in video games and music don't promote violence. It is because of real world violence that such games, movies, and music is made. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Sigh another politician jumping on the bandwagon (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 07:17 pm UTC (link)
	First off, has this lady looked at all the video game legislation's proposed in the last couple months? This one will be declared unconstitutional like all the rest. It's an election year for her. The constitutionality of the legislation doesn't matter as long as it sounds good to the voting public. - Steven (Reply to this) (Parent)

	beardoggx 2006-01-10 12:55 pm UTC (link)
	Not only is she a bandwagon jumper and a Democrat, it's also no surprise that she's also up for re-election this year(so is Blagojevich and Schwarzenegger). (Reply to this)

	"Video games and music lyrics promote violence" (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 12:59 pm UTC (link)
	So why is she only proposing limits on video games? Oh thats right, blaming music isnt fashionable any more. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: "Video games and music lyrics promote violence" healer1422 2006-01-10 01:24 pm UTC (link)
	I blame 2 Live Crew for the increase in video game violence.... (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: "Video games and music lyrics promote violence" -

artheleron, 2006-01-10 06:03 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 01:01 pm UTC (link)

"Moms and dads shouldn't be alone in their fight to raise children the right way. They shouldn't be alone in their fight to instill the values that lead to a life of meaning, rather than a life wasted."

And if parents actually took the time to raise their kids the right way, we wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we? We wouldn't have to worry about some deranged teenager shooting up a school and blaming it on an entertainment medium.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

drgrumbles
2006-01-10 01:13 pm UTC (link)

I think that Moms and dads should be alone in their fight to raise their children the right way. Anything else would be passing off responsibility. They're your kids, and its your job and your job alone to raise them.

Jesus tapdancing christ. Just talk to your kids! It's not hard! Treat them like adults and give them the benefit of the doubt. They're smarter than everyone is giving them credit for.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) -

omega_ody, 2006-01-10 01:46 pm UTC

(no subject) -

tyrillpaladin, 2006-01-10 03:16 pm UTC

	namco_ 2006-01-10 01:20 pm UTC (link)
	The american gaming certification system needs a good look at though. In the UK games like GTA have an 18 (being the highest). In your system GTA can be played by MA (17), Manhunt is also MA despite its goryness. What puzzles me is that anything depicting sex would be immediately classed as AO yet MA is ok for really gory games..... (Reply to this) (Thread)

rich_d7
2006-01-10 01:35 pm UTC (link)

I'm quite surprised by this as well, as it seems gory/violent material (whether it be games or films/television) doesn't cause half the controversy as sexual material does. I remember the fuss caused over Janet Jacksons nip-slip a while back. Also, the whole Hot Coffee incident arose out of sexual situations, not all the violents acts in the game.

The UK is included in this strange thinking as well, as walk into any Virgin or HMV store and anyone of any age can browse dvd's ranging in age U to 18, but the sexual 18 rated films (which in this country show nothing more than a flash of furr) are hidden away. The message being put out seems to be violence okay, sex no. (I'm not getting into the whole UK thing of 16 to have sex, yet 18 to look at pictures of naked people).

Even many years ago I recall being allowed (at the age of 15) to watch some violent horror films, yet the trouble I got into when I was caught watching my first softcore skin-flick!!!

Rich

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

jythie, 2006-01-10 05:23 pm UTC

(no subject) -

silver_derstin, 2006-01-10 02:12 pm UTC

(no subject) -

sqlrob, 2006-01-10 02:39 pm UTC

Wait... -

ferrarimanf355, 2006-01-10 03:38 pm UTC

I concur. -

ferrarimanf355, 2006-01-10 03:37 pm UTC

Re: I concur. -

namco_, 2006-01-10 03:51 pm UTC

Jack Thompson Here to Explain It to You, and Thanks for Asking - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:09 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here to Explain It to You, and Thanks for Asking -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 07:22 pm UTC

Duffy here has a question -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 08:04 pm UTC

Duffy here has a question -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 08:05 pm UTC

Re: Duffy here has a question -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 08:06 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here to Explain It to You, and Thanks for Asking -

namco_, 2006-01-10 09:47 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here to Explain It to You, and Thanks for Asking -

kajex, 2006-01-10 10:06 pm UTC

Hey I am Cool..Carlito Cool! -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 11:43 pm UTC

Re: Hey I am Cool..Carlito Cool! -

beardoggx, 2006-01-11 02:21 am UTC

Re: Hey I am Cool..Carlito Cool! -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-11 02:42 am UTC

Re: Hey I am Cool..Carlito Cool! -

beardoggx, 2006-01-11 02:52 am UTC

Re: Hey I am Cool..Carlito Cool! -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-11 02:55 am UTC

Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes
(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 01:50 pm UTC (link)

I am working with legislators now in six states to pass video game legislation to prohibit the sale of sexual and violent games harmful to minors. We have the way to do this constitutionally. Kiss your mature-games-to-kids arrangement good-bye.

Secondly, here is a warning to you folks here who post and send annoying messages that pertain to me. President Bush has signed into law a bill, that your asylum keeper here, Dennis McCauley, managed to miss. From now on, if your posts pertain to me, and are of their typical tenor, then you must provide your true identity in the post. Good luck on this one, pixelantes. Dennis, consider yourself warned:

Create an e-annoyance, go to jail
By Declan McCullagh
http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance%2C+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.

It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.

A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.

The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.

Clinton Fein, a San Francisco resident who runs the Annoy.com site, says a feature permitting visitors to send obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled.

"Who decides what's annoying? That's the ultimate question," Fein said. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?"

Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." But the courts ruled the law applied only to obscene material, so Annoy.com didn't have to worry.

"I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. "I would fight it on First Amendment grounds."

Copyright ©1995-2006 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes jerico6 2006-01-10 02:09 pm UTC (link)
	I am PROUD to be a pixelante! Jack Thompson. You can go FUCK OFF! (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:10 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:11 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

xiiiwulf, 2006-01-10 04:12 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

silver_derstin, 2006-01-10 02:10 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:12 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy -

beardoggx, 2006-01-10 02:16 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:40 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy -

beardoggx, 2006-01-10 02:58 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy -

tollwutig, 2006-01-10 03:05 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy -

healer1422, 2006-01-10 04:26 pm UTC

Re: You didn't post the full article, Jacky boy -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 07:43 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

rich_d7, 2006-01-10 02:18 pm UTC

Re: Jack's the one with brain damage, IMHO -

beardoggx, 2006-01-10 02:44 pm UTC

Re: Jack's the one with brain damage, IMHO -

omega_ody, 2006-01-10 07:05 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:20 pm UTC

Re: Because it is different -

beardoggx, 2006-01-10 02:31 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

rich_d7, 2006-01-10 02:21 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

aniki21, 2006-01-10 02:30 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

namco_, 2006-01-10 02:32 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

xiiiwulf, 2006-01-10 04:24 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

namco_, 2006-01-10 04:44 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

xiiiwulf, 2006-01-10 05:05 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

bigman_k, 2006-01-10 02:32 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:37 pm UTC

A harassment in Hiku -

kharne83, 2006-01-10 02:38 pm UTC

Re: A harassment in Hiku - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 02:46 pm UTC

Re: A harassment in Hiku -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 07:46 pm UTC

Re: A harassment in Hiku -

rhanlav, 2006-01-10 08:07 pm UTC

Re: A harassment in Hiku -

kharne83, 2006-01-10 08:25 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

namco_, 2006-01-10 02:40 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

sqlrob, 2006-01-10 02:45 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

tollwutig, 2006-01-10 02:57 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

tollwutig, 2006-01-10 02:59 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

evilrockstu, 2006-01-10 03:02 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

evilrockstu, 2006-01-10 05:24 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

markusdragon, 2006-01-10 06:14 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 03:03 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

jindewinter, 2006-01-10 03:11 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

squirrelofwrath, 2006-01-10 03:15 pm UTC

For the love of all things cute and cuddly, will you just shut up and go away?! -

jaimas, 2006-01-10 03:19 pm UTC

Re: For the love of all things cute and cuddly, will you just shut up and go away?! -

namco_, 2006-01-10 03:26 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

tyrillpaladin, 2006-01-10 03:22 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

ace_ofspade, 2006-01-10 03:45 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

ianc14, 2006-01-10 03:46 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

ace_ofspade, 2006-01-10 03:52 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 04:18 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

empress_tigress, 2006-01-10 07:36 pm UTC

GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

gamepolitics, 2006-01-10 04:23 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

xiiiwulf, 2006-01-10 04:30 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

skemodan, 2006-01-10 04:39 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 05:39 pm UTC

Indeed. -

jaimas, 2006-01-11 09:57 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

the1jeffy, 2006-01-10 05:04 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

gamepolitics, 2006-01-11 01:15 am UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 05:47 pm UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

gamepolitics, 2006-01-11 01:18 am UTC

Re: GamePolitics Points Fills in What Jack Thompson Left Out -

beardoggx, 2006-01-11 02:27 am UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 04:35 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

verbinator, 2006-01-10 04:36 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 04:37 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

jythie, 2006-01-10 04:37 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

bhaalchild, 2006-01-10 04:39 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 04:57 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

skemodan, 2006-01-10 05:42 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 05:50 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:03 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-11 01:41 am UTC

Didn't you say you were never coming back to GP? -

carmine, 2006-01-10 05:20 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

l0que, 2006-01-10 05:25 pm UTC

Nice try, Jack... -

grombar, 2006-01-10 05:38 pm UTC

Re: Nice try, Jack... - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 05:44 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 05:59 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

seifd, 2006-01-10 06:08 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

artheleron, 2006-01-10 06:11 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 08:01 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

ryukisargi, 2006-01-10 07:06 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

illspirit, 2006-01-10 07:47 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:22 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-11 08:44 am UTC

Thanks for the warning - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:24 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:45 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 09:02 pm UTC

Joshua McGill here with a warning and clarification for Jack Thompson -

jdmdsp911, 2006-01-10 09:42 pm UTC

Re: Joshua McGill here with a warning and clarification for Jack Thompson -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 11:21 pm UTC

Re: Joshua McGill here with a warning and clarification for Jack Thompson -

jdmdsp911, 2006-01-11 06:19 pm UTC

Re: Joshua McGill here with a warning and clarification for Jack Thompson -

beardoggx, 2006-01-11 02:29 am UTC

Re: dog_welder here with a warning to bottom-feeding, incompetent lawyers -

dog_welder, 2006-01-10 11:58 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes - (Anonymous), 2006-01-11 01:01 am UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

tconx, 2006-01-11 01:22 am UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

tsuroki, 2006-01-11 03:59 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here with a Warning for the Pixelantes -

anchoriteblue, 2006-01-13 06:44 am UTC

aniki21
2006-01-10 02:24 pm UTC (link)

Jesus, do they ever stop?

Kids are too well-protected these days. When was the last time you saw a proper playground for kids, with merry-go-rounds and swings and slides and all? I grew up on those things, smacked my mouth on the concrete more than once, and it didn't do me a bit of harm. You just learned not to be so goddamn stupid next time - no lawsuit required. We're going to end up with a bunch of molly-coddled adults with no idea how harsh the world really is, and people like Governor Sebelius are to blame.

As for the specific gaming issue, that's even more tired than the "won't somebody think of the children!?" warcry that these idiots have been screaming for the last God-knows-how-long.

I don't think many people here will argue against the idea that there should be some kind of controls on what kinds of media children are exposed to, and how long they get exposed each day. The problem as I see it - and I'm sure more than a couple of people here will agree - is that it's a job for a child's parents, not the government; and to be honest I think that legislation that prevents unequivocally access to materials based solely on age rather than their individual emotional maturity (we all know that kids aren't all the same; some will be mentally prepared to differentiate fiction from reality at an earier age than others) does more to stunt the intellectual and emotional growth of some children more than it will help any others.

I'd also like to know why the "music lyrics" thread gets dropped so quickly - she continues to harp on about the internet, violent games and TV shows, but it seems she doesn't want to get on the RIAA's bad side by calling for controls on music sales...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 02:55 pm UTC (link)

Well, clearly the video game industry hasn't learned to properly bribe the US Politicians yet! Oh, I'm sorry. They don't provide enough "Campaign Funding". Because bribery is illegal, and stuff.

It's a lame excuse to blame video games. My eleven-year-old brother has a video game collection numbering about twenty games or so. It might take my parents a little more than half an hour pawing through them to figure out how appropriate they are for him, if they take the time to look up each game individually and read the blurb. Five minutes, if they weren't educated on the ESRB ratings already and decided to use that as a basis for their judgement.

It's lazy parenting to not know what your child's hobby is and how appropriate it is or is not for the child's age. It shouldn't take anything more than a slightly concerned parent to learn the ESRB rating system. Pamphlets can be acquired at game stores, Blockbusters, and many other rental places. It can be downloaded off the ESRB site. Posters are in many game stores which explicitly outline all the required information.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Monster hunter, demon slayer, fear monger -

kharne83, 2006-01-10 03:11 pm UTC

Re: Monster hunter, demon slayer, fear monger - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 03:35 pm UTC

Re: Monster hunter, demon slayer, fear monger -

kharne83, 2006-01-10 03:54 pm UTC

Re: Monster hunter, demon slayer, fear monger - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:23 pm UTC

(no subject) -

empress_tigress, 2006-01-10 08:15 pm UTC

still wish i could of seen that -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-11 03:55 am UTC

Re: still wish i could of seen that -

empress_tigress, 2006-01-11 06:40 am UTC

	Oh, god DAMNIT jaimas 2006-01-10 02:58 pm UTC (link)
	Damn you, Sebelius! You know, I spend god knows how long stating about how stupidity knows no party, then you go and do something like this, seemingly as a blatant attempt to prove me wrong. You suck. You really do. Thank you for undermining about a week and a half of work. Bitch. - Jaimas (Reply to this)

	What a dickhead... spartan_sword 2006-01-10 03:10 pm UTC (link)
	Jack, you really need to fuck off. You think you got the upper hand, and all that's happening is that your legal career is going down the toilet and you are loosing all credibility. As for your constitutional way to pass anti-game laws, i'd like to see it. Please, share with us your plans. I'm shaking in my fucking boots. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Teehee. jaimas 2006-01-10 03:23 pm UTC (link)
	Shaking in your boots? Aren't we all? Honestly, we gamers should be terrified of his blatantly unconstitutional gaming legislation that has been universally struck down in every court it's gone before. Because, you know, Jack worked hard on it. Before the Florida Bar suddenly came to their senses and had that whole sanity requirement. :P - Jaimas (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: What a dickhead... -

tyrillpaladin, 2006-01-10 03:33 pm UTC

Re: What a dickhead... -

nintendite, 2006-01-10 11:55 pm UTC

My brain hurts from all this LOGIC!
(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 03:44 pm UTC (link)

"In the coming days, I will make these tools available to parents across Kansas."

Indeed? And what in particular are these tools you'll supply? Certainly it can't be another piece of legislation. I would think a Governor might actually keep abreast on the political developments in other states, so of course, seeing that so many other pieces of video game legislation have failed, introducing one of your own would just be a waste of time right?

Unless these "tools" are actual physical tools that can disassemble the PS2, Xbox, GameCube etc... then there isn't much you can do.

(Reply to this)

	(Anonymous) 2006-01-10 03:51 pm UTC (link)
	Music Lyrics ... you mean like "I can get no ... satisfaction?". Caused some major crying back then :p (Reply to this) (Thread)

	namco_ 2006-01-10 04:00 pm UTC (link)
	speaking of music lyrics. "Hit the road Jack....." (Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) -

indystarx, 2006-01-10 05:37 pm UTC

	I think it deserves to be said outside a sea of replies... (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 03:55 pm UTC (link)
	It wasn't posted on GP because it had nothing to do with gaming. We wouldn't be able to fine Jack unless I missed something, considering he's posting his full name. What more ID does one need? Eh, I'm a Canadian who thinks bush is an idiot. This kind of thing really doesn't surprise me, especially with no attempt to get canada into it. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: I think it deserves to be said outside a sea of replies... (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 07:35 pm UTC (link)
	Does a tehcnicality like that count? (Reply to this) (Parent)

Ruffie-Colada politics - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:29 pm UTC

Re: Ruffie-Colada politics -

jdmdsp911, 2006-01-10 10:00 pm UTC

Re: Ruffie-Colada politics -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 10:34 pm UTC

	xiiiwulf 2006-01-10 04:04 pm UTC (link)
	Bandwagon, a-friggen-hoy. (Reply to this)

	jythie 2006-01-10 04:35 pm UTC (link)
	"Parents today face new challenges that we didn't have when our children were younger." Ahm, was this not also being said last generation? If I recall correctly, people in her age group, when they were children, also had parents up in arms about new challenges and how children are not being raised in as wholesome an enviroment as they were. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	tsknf 2006-01-10 04:38 pm UTC (link)
	Tells you somehting doesn't It? New biological research shows that times of distress or illness can be passed on from one generation to the next. Same must go for scrapegoating. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

jythie, 2006-01-10 04:50 pm UTC

(no subject) -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 08:18 pm UTC

(no subject) -

jythie, 2006-01-10 08:26 pm UTC

gasp.... -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 08:48 pm UTC

Well Now...

catch_33
2006-01-10 04:38 pm UTC (link)

Parents today face new challenges that we didn't have when our children were younger.

What new challenges?

Video games and music lyrics promote violence...

And movies and TV shows don't?

Moms and dads shouldn't be alone in their fight to raise children the right way. They shouldn't be alone in their fight to instill the values that lead to a life of meaning, rather than a life wasted.

It doesn't have to be a "fight".

We can help parents by giving them access to tools... and limits on access to violent video games. In the coming days, I will make these tools available to parents across Kansas.

Wait, you said music lyrics promote violence as well. Why aren't you doing anything about that?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Well Now... tsknf 2006-01-10 04:40 pm UTC (link)
	Video games and music lyrics promote violence... And movies and TV shows don't? This has 'bandwagon' written all over it. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Well Now... -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 05:05 pm UTC

Re: Well Now... -

illspirit, 2006-01-10 07:53 pm UTC

Re: Well Now... -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 09:05 pm UTC

Re: Well Now... -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 10:38 pm UTC

	bloodstorm_pd 2006-01-10 04:48 pm UTC (link)
	Moms and dads shouldn't be alone in their fight to raise children the right way. Then maybe they need to consult all of us prior to having them. I don't recall being asked if I wanted mom-x and dad-y to have a kid, but as a developer I should be partly responsible for raising them? (Reply to this)

And while I'm at it...

catch_33
2006-01-10 04:48 pm UTC (link)

I am working with legislators now in six states to pass video game legislation to prohibit the sale of sexual and violent games harmful to minors.

Ooooh, we're so scared.[/sarcasm]

We have the way to do this constitutionally.

Pah! Not possible.

Kiss your mature-games-to-kids arrangement good-bye.

You say that as if we're all 15 year olds that have made a deal with game developers and retailers. You're a dumbass.

Secondly, here is a warning to you folks here who post and send annoying messages that pertain to me. President Bush has signed into law a bill, that your asylum keeper here, Dennis McCauley, managed to miss. From now on, if your posts pertain to me, and are of their typical tenor, then you must provide your true identity in the post. Good luck on this one, pixelantes. Dennis, consider yourself warned:

Seeings how that law is un-Constitutional, and only pertains to email, you're not scaring anyone. Nice try though.

By the way, go fuck yourself. ^_^

(Reply to this)

	BTW, Jack... spartan_sword 2006-01-10 05:05 pm UTC (link)
	I have no fucking problem revealing who I am if I email you. Hell, if you want, i'll give you my name, address, age, you name and as long as it isn't my social, you can have it. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: BTW, Jack... catch_33 2006-01-10 05:09 pm UTC (link)
	I'm not telling him shit, and there's nothing he can do about it. I find it funny that the very think he'd love to have as a weapon against us could get him in trouble as well. Because I think everyone here can agree that he posts solely to annoy. And he doesn't use his real name either. His real name is John Bruce Thompson. You're a joke Jacky Boy. You're a joke. ^_^ (Reply to this) (Parent)

Clean up your filthy mouth first, please. Thanks. - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:04 pm UTC

(Deleted post)

Re: John, do you... -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 07:17 pm UTC

Re: John, do you... -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 10:41 pm UTC

Re: John, do you... -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 10:58 pm UTC

Re: John, do you... -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 11:56 pm UTC

Re: John, do you... -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 10:40 pm UTC

Re: Clean up your filthy mouth first, please. Thanks. -

ianc14, 2006-01-10 07:54 pm UTC

Re: Clean up your filthy mouth first, please. Thanks. -

goldelite, 2006-01-10 08:53 pm UTC

I think she's right
(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 05:13 pm UTC (link)

Sebelius is on the mark here. Parents alone cannot raise kids, so we have to rely on the state to help raise our children. Just ask Joseph Stalin, he'll agree. (I'm calling this lady a communist if you can't catch the subtle drift).

Jacko has no idea about the internet. People post anonymously all the time! Nothing can stop that.

Jack, you're a jerk. I'm legally protected by that. It's not threatening, I didn't say we should do anything bad to you (I do not find that honorable), I'm just stating my feelings. I'm protect by what makes USA great!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I think she's right

spartan_sword
2006-01-10 05:20 pm UTC (link)

Yeah, we all know that parents have to have the goverment to raise their kids! ROFL!

I'm still legally a minor and I can handle a mature game because my parents taught me right from wrong and used the ESRB to deny me certain games when I was younger that I shouldn't have been playing. So, the moral here is that if parents were worth a jack like mine, then we wouldn't be having this discussion... :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

topj
2006-01-10 05:14 pm UTC (link)

There are over six billion people on this over-crowded earth. If you feel the desire to bring in another one, then it is your responsibility to raise him. That means when little Johnny wants to go into a game store, don't hand him a fifty and walk away. If you want to regulate what he's playing, go into the store with him, look at the game he's picked out, and pay attention to the ESRB rating on it. It's not just there to look pretty, it has a purpose.

(Reply to this)

This just in!

jabrwock
2006-01-10 05:31 pm UTC (link)

John Bruce Thompson, a Miami lawyer was cited earlier today for posting messages online. The posts ranged from idle threats to childish insults, and were regarded by the on-line communities posted-to as "annoying". It was found that Mr. Thompson was not using his true identity, but was in fact using an alias "Jack". Mr. Thompson was promptly arrested under Sec. 113. Court reporters note that the expected punishment will likely be five across the face...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 06:05 pm UTC (link)
	Jack Thompson (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Guess what? -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:18 pm UTC

(Deleted post)

Oh NOES!!! Teh burnination! -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:28 pm UTC

Re: Oh NOES!!! Teh burnination! -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 06:30 pm UTC

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. -

ianc14, 2006-01-10 06:29 pm UTC

My letter to anyone who cares... :) -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:37 pm UTC

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:56 pm UTC

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 07:06 pm UTC

(Deleted post)

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 07:16 pm UTC

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. -

pixelante_ninja, 2006-01-10 08:29 pm UTC

Re: Dennis, here's your first violation. See above. -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 08:55 pm UTC

Question: -

tollwutig, 2006-01-10 08:10 pm UTC

Re: Question: -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 09:01 pm UTC

Re: Question: -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 09:04 pm UTC

I smell a plot

skemodan
2006-01-10 05:44 pm UTC (link)

Conspirators. Has anyone taken into account how much money it's costing the gaming industry to file lawsuits against all these states. Perhaps despite all efforts to create an effective law, this is all just a ploy. The real goal is to bankrupt the industry so there will be no need for laws to be passed. It's not a very good plan, but seriously, you would think after all the overturned laws regarding gaming legislation they would have given up by now. Either that or they don't read the news.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: I smell a plot catch_33 2006-01-10 06:24 pm UTC (link)
	That's certainly possible. Not likely though. Anti-gamers aren't very bright. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: I smell a plot - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:25 pm UTC

Re: I smell a plot -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:30 pm UTC

Re: I smell a plot -

gamepolitics, 2006-01-10 09:35 pm UTC

Re: I smell a plot -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 09:51 pm UTC

Re: I smell a plot -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 10:59 pm UTC

Jack Thompson Here
(Anonymous)
2006-01-10 06:02 pm UTC (link)

I have spoken with the Kansas Governor's office, and what they are planning is not legislation but rather a parent/mentoring program to provide tools to keep kids away from these harmful games.

I do just that because of an agreement between me and the Miami-Dade School System, the nation's fourth largest, which may surprise some of the folks at this site, who think my view (wrongly) is that parents cannot do more to protect their kids.

I look forward to assisting the State of Kansas on this issue. I'm sure all of you folks who post at this site will be offering your service pro bono as well, since you all like the parents-must-take-responsibility approach. Please make sure Penny Arcade donates its assistance as well. Hooah. Jack Thompson

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Jack Thompson Here

skemodan
2006-01-10 06:40 pm UTC (link)

You and John Kerry would be great friends. What with the whole flip-flopping thing. Not so much the "you're a dirty sinner" part, but the flip-flopping you've mastered, almost like an art. You can barely keep your oppinions evident other than you don't like video games, any more than that, your stance eludes us all. I keep saying it, you're going to learn your lesson the hard way and it's going to hurt like nothing else. My only regret is that I won't be able to see your face when it finally hits you that your life is a total waste and you have spent it serving a pointless cause only to gain the vain providence you call your own success. Unfortunately, no one else thinks you're intelligent, smart, capable, charming, handsome, fortunate, or a good christian. So when you fail, I can only hope what little manhood you have left can stand up and take the blow for you so that you may waste away in peace after your fall. Sinner.

Dan Barron

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Jack Thompson Here - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:43 pm UTC

Stuart Copland here -

evilrockstu, 2006-01-10 07:10 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here -

hilaryduffgta, 2006-01-10 07:20 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here -

illspirit, 2006-01-10 08:08 pm UTC

Wait... - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:32 pm UTC

Re: Wait... -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 08:37 pm UTC

Re: Jack Thompson Here - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 09:47 pm UTC

Your name is JOHN BRUCE THOMPSON - (Anonymous), 2006-01-11 07:06 am UTC

Re: Your name is JOHN BRUCE THOMPSON -

skemodan, 2006-01-11 08:16 am UTC

	IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 06:11 pm UTC (link)
	... he would have done what I did and call the Governor to find that she is not proposing a video game law, just a mentoring program. But, then again, Dennis McCauley is not a real journalist, so what do you expect? Jack Thompson (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... (Anonymous) 2006-01-10 06:17 pm UTC (link)
	Hey Jack, Speaking of diligence... How's that whole smear campaign against the Florida Bar Association going? Still about to lose your license to practice law? Super. Cheers, -AnonymousGuy (Reply to this) (Parent)

Guess Jack can't read either -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:20 pm UTC

Instructions For Jack -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 06:26 pm UTC

Re: Instructions For Jack - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 06:29 pm UTC

(Deleted post)

Re: Also, I don't believe you spoke with her. -

jabrwock, 2006-01-10 06:31 pm UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... -

the1jeffy, 2006-01-10 06:54 pm UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... -

healer1422, 2006-01-10 07:00 pm UTC

IF JACK THOMPSON HAD BOTHERED TO TAKE HIS PILLS THIS MORNING... -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 07:02 pm UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... -

gamepolitics, 2006-01-10 08:31 pm UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 08:41 pm UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... -

chuma, 2006-01-11 11:18 am UTC

I EXPECTED.... - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 08:35 pm UTC

Caps Lock! -

spock_walk, 2006-01-10 08:37 pm UTC

Re: Caps Lock! -

catch_33, 2006-01-10 08:40 pm UTC

Re: Caps Lock! -

nightwng2000, 2006-01-10 10:55 pm UTC

CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL -

suigin_kou, 2006-01-11 01:16 am UTC

Re: If Jack Thompson had bothered to study.... -

beardoggx, 2006-01-11 02:40 am UTC

Re: IF DENNIS MCCAULEY HAD BOTHERED TO DO HIS JOURNALISTIC DUE DILIGENCE... - (Anonymous), 2006-01-11 11:18 am UTC

Oh, Jack... -

quad9damage, 2006-01-11 02:45 pm UTC

	The thing about Jack is..... quartermaine 2006-01-10 06:18 pm UTC (link)
	he posts and then runs and hides. Very hard to get a response out of him. He drops bombs, but then goes and runs and hides in his grotto in Coral Gables where he can't be hit back with logic, which the posters of GP have in spades. (Reply to this) (Thread)

(Deleted post)

Re: The thing about Jack is..... - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 09:52 pm UTC

(327 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Page 1 of 3
<<	[1] [2] [3]	>>

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs